The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a lawsuit seeking to stop the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Judicial Service Committee and the National Judicial Council (NJC) from considering Chukwuemeka Tony Ubani, Director of Enforcement at the FCT High Court, for appointment as a judge.
Justice Inyang Ekwo dismissed the case on Thursday, October 29, 2026, after the plaintiff, Bizplus Consulting Services Limited, filed a notice of discontinuance, indicating its decision to withdraw the action.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2174/2026, sought to restrain the FCT Judicial Service Committee and the NJC from screening, shortlisting, evaluating or recommending Ubani for judicial appointment until allegations concerning his handling of a judgment enforcement process involving the Benue State Government were investigated. At Thursday’s proceedings, counsel to the defendants, Akinlolu Kehinde, SAN, informed the court that Bizplus had filed a notice of discontinuance.
Kehinde urged the court to dismiss the suit with costs, arguing that the parties had already joined issues before the plaintiff decided to discontinue the proceedings.
In his ruling, Justice Ekwo held that the notice of discontinuance was deemed and consequently dismissed the suit.
The dispute originated from allegations by Bizplus concerning Ubani’s involvement in efforts to enforce a judgment debt against the Benue State Government through funds allegedly held by United Bank for Africa (UBA) Plc.
In an affidavit supporting its application, Bizplus explained that it was a judgment creditor in a separate legal dispute involving the Benue State Government.Nigerian Law updates
The company stated that on December 4, 2025, the FCT High Court issued a garnishee order absolute in its favour as part of efforts to recover the outstanding judgment debt.
A garnishee order absolute is a court directive compelling a third party, typically a bank holding money belonging to a judgment debtor, to release the specified funds to the judgment creditor.
Bizplus alleged that following the order, Ubani, acting in his capacity as Director of Enforcement at the FCT High Court, wrote a letter dated May 4, 2026, requesting police assistance to facilitate its execution.
According to the company, the letter formed part of the administrative steps taken to enforce the garnishee order against funds allegedly belonging to the Benue State Government and held by UBA. However, the enforcement exercise later became contentious after the bank reportedly objected to the proposed execution.
Bizplus claimed that the operation was suspended on September 4, 2026, following an objection by UBA, which reportedly relied on its interpretation of a Court of Appeal order directing the parties to maintain the status quo.
The company further alleged that despite Ubani’s earlier written request for police assistance, he subsequently denied authorising the enforcement operation.
Bizplus described the alleged contradiction as a serious concern requiring investigation by the appropriate judicial authorities.
Consequently, the company submitted petitions to the FCT Judicial Service Committee and the NJC, requesting an investigation into Ubani’s conduct during the enforcement proceedings.
It argued that the allegations should be examined before the authorities considered him for appointment to the Bench.Court Case Summaries
The company later approached the Federal High Court, seeking orders to prevent the judicial appointment process from proceeding while the issues raised in its petitions remained unresolved.
In its originating processes, Bizplus asked the court to restrain the FCT Judicial Service Committee and the NJC from screening, shortlisting, evaluating or recommending Ubani for judicial appointment.
It also sought orders suspending any steps already taken towards his proposed appointment.
The plaintiff maintained that the allegations surrounding the enforcement of the judgment debt raised serious questions that warranted investigation before Ubani could be considered for judicial office.
However, Ubani challenged the suit through a preliminary objection, questioning the legal standing of Bizplus to institute the proceedings.
He argued that the company lacked the requisite locus standi to interfere with the judicial appointment process because it had failed to establish any personal injury, enforceable legal right or sufficient interest that would justify its action.
Ubani further maintained that being a judgment creditor in a separate case involving the Benue State Government did not automatically give Bizplus the legal authority to challenge the statutory responsibilities of institutions overseeing judicial appointments.
He also argued that any petitions submitted against him should be handled by the relevant authorities in accordance with their statutory powers.
The objection therefore questioned whether the company had a legally recognised basis to invoke the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court to halt the appointment process.
Other defendants in the suit included the FCT Judicial Service Committee, the National Judicial Council and the Attorney-General of the Federation.
However, before the court could determine the substantive allegations or Ubani’s preliminary objection, Bizplus filed a notice of discontinuance, signalling its decision to withdraw the case.
At Thursday’s hearing, Kehinde urged the court to dismiss the proceedings rather than merely strike out the suit, maintaining that the parties had already joined issues.
Justice Ekwo accepted the position and dismissed the case.Justice System Analysis
The dismissal effectively brings the particular proceedings before the Federal High Court to an end without a judicial determination of the allegations levelled against Ubani.
Importantly, the ruling does not establish that the allegations made by Bizplus were true, nor does it amount to a finding that Ubani committed any misconduct.
The court also did not determine the merits of the underlying judgment debt dispute involving Bizplus, the Benue State Government and UBA.
Rather, the case concerned the company’s attempt to obtain judicial orders preventing the relevant authorities from considering Ubani for appointment to the FCT High Court Bench.
Following the dismissal, the specific lawsuit seeking to halt his consideration for judicial appointment is no longer pending before the Federal High Court.